I like the idea of the Friday Five. There is definitely too much to read, and it's interesting to see what you pick out of the pack. Still not convinced the Shapiro strategy is persuasion through "moderation," but his strategy is certainly worth watching, no matter how it is characterized. I like what I'm seeing with Rob Sand, in Iowa, too.
I am betting on another oscillation. Trump (and AOC) are symptoms not the cause of the deep divisions. The cause is the utter failure of the Establishment in politics and everything else. You can't create a stable coalition on this foundation.
I'm confused. The chart on black Americans/Democrats answering the question about black poverty doesn't correspond with the text above which deals with a differently/oppositely worded question.
I had to re-read it a couple times. The percentage of white Democrats who agree: "Racial differences in jobs, income and housing are mainly because most black people lack the will to pull themselves out of poverty" dropped from 60% to below 10% while way more black Americans agreed with the premise.
I don’t believe the Democrat elites will allow Shapiro to win the nomination. The Democratic party has gradually but consistently become anti-Jewish. Their DSA faction would never allow a Jew to head the ticket. All signs point to Dems trying to install Harris as the candidate.
I think Dems remain stuck in the deep delusion of a "Trump cult." (Who said Barack Obama was the greatest President in American history? That Hillary Clinton was the MOST qualified candidate in history? Hell, even when your nominee was dog water you claimed it was Brat Summer and said she did an amazing job in only 100 days when literally no one had ever heard of her. Who worships their political leaders again?)
Rightwing populism is ascendent, meanwhile the Democrats will not be able to get their act together for decades. Josh Shapiro is the depressing reminder of that. Setting aside the substantial part of the liberal electorate who wants to see him genocided, how would a moderate Democrat ever be nominated by Democratic voters when they don't believe in moderation? Democratic voters haven't turned against racial essentialism, trans ideology, feminism, utterly disproven pro-open borders economics, government censorship, stifling regulations, or throwing the Constitution in the dumpster behind the National Archives. It's just everybody else has.
And that's what will keep the rightwing coalition strong, it's about who they're not voting for. They're not voting for Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, or anybody else who longs for a return to serfdom. And they're not voting for anybody who not just doesn't know what a woman is, they're not voting for anybody who can't turn to their own party and tell them that it's stupid they don't know what a woman is. And anybody who can do that on the left is going to have a real time dodging both the tar and the feathers. The delusion that some magical "coalition" is otherwise needed is, well, let's just say Kamala didn't actually win Iowa by 10 points because reality doesn't work the way liberals think it does.
As for the five recommended articles, that seems like a great idea.
“Rightwing populism is ascendent, meanwhile the Democrats will not be able to get their act together for decades.”
The ‘Emerging Democratic Majority’ called, it wants its inevitability back.
”I think Dems remain stuck in the deep delusion of a "Trump cult."
You mistake the cult as merely being constituted by praise of the leader, when that is secondary. What is primary is the *refusal to criticize the leader*. Any Republican who has been remotely critical of Trump, even just for breaking campaign promises (Iran) or building ballrooms to himself while affordability remains unaddressed, has been summarily excommunicated from the party. That is the cult’s nature.
Rightwing populism needs cults of personality to work. The cult of personality is what legitimates the loyalty to the strongman over loyalty to political institutions, laws, norms, etc. Those institutions get in the way of inflicting pain on the out group and the consolidation of power in the strongman’s hands, which is the spiritual core of rightwing populism. You see it everywhere rightwing populism reigns—without its Erdogan, its Orban, its Bukele, it all falls apart.
Unfortunately, in the U.S. people are now-seeing what mask-off rightwing sadopopulism really looks like. It is openly kleptocratic, unrepentantly corrupt, and fairly unconcerned with anything the leader doesn’t feel like focusing on, save for inflicting pain on the outgroup. That is why its leader’s approval ratings are already lower than his predecessor’s—‘owning the libs’, renaming lakes and building ballrooms for yourself, and calling for any internal critics to be crushed, doesn’t fundamentally improve people’s livelihoods. This has always been the case, and is why historically it has required the strongman to corrupt and subordinate democratic institutions to perpetuate his movement.
Well, the emerging Democratic majority was based on pseudoscience by humanities academics, while political eras are based on centuries of data. Neoliberalism had its run, rightwing populism is taking over, it's not a guarantee, but it's a runaway favorite.
As far as not criticizing the leader, I think you missed a good chunk of my comment, or did I just miss all the criticism of Dear Leader Barack Obama? Even now Democrats openly say its the voters' fault Hillary lost. And I've read hundreds of online comments about "all the people who stayed home" in 2024 just because they couldn't get their socialist way and petulantly refused to vote for Kamala, never mind that all those people are imaginary and Democrats simply aren't a majority political movement anymore.
As to rightwing populism needing a strong man, I haven't seen any empirical reason to believe that, though I guess liberal kleptocracy needs a strong man, as after Barack Obama it's really fallen apart. Biden managing to swipe as much as he could on the way out the door before pardoning the members of his crime family. As far as conservative populists needing to subordinate democratic institutions to perpetuate the movement, all I've seen is Trump win two legitimate democratic elections fair and square (at least on his side). It seems that being an authoritarian or a fascist is about the only thing Trump's legitimately failed at.
I like the idea of the Friday Five. There is definitely too much to read, and it's interesting to see what you pick out of the pack. Still not convinced the Shapiro strategy is persuasion through "moderation," but his strategy is certainly worth watching, no matter how it is characterized. I like what I'm seeing with Rob Sand, in Iowa, too.
I am betting on another oscillation. Trump (and AOC) are symptoms not the cause of the deep divisions. The cause is the utter failure of the Establishment in politics and everything else. You can't create a stable coalition on this foundation.
I'm confused. The chart on black Americans/Democrats answering the question about black poverty doesn't correspond with the text above which deals with a differently/oppositely worded question.
Editor's mistake! Should make more sense now.
I had to re-read it a couple times. The percentage of white Democrats who agree: "Racial differences in jobs, income and housing are mainly because most black people lack the will to pull themselves out of poverty" dropped from 60% to below 10% while way more black Americans agreed with the premise.
I don’t believe the Democrat elites will allow Shapiro to win the nomination. The Democratic party has gradually but consistently become anti-Jewish. Their DSA faction would never allow a Jew to head the ticket. All signs point to Dems trying to install Harris as the candidate.
I think Dems remain stuck in the deep delusion of a "Trump cult." (Who said Barack Obama was the greatest President in American history? That Hillary Clinton was the MOST qualified candidate in history? Hell, even when your nominee was dog water you claimed it was Brat Summer and said she did an amazing job in only 100 days when literally no one had ever heard of her. Who worships their political leaders again?)
Rightwing populism is ascendent, meanwhile the Democrats will not be able to get their act together for decades. Josh Shapiro is the depressing reminder of that. Setting aside the substantial part of the liberal electorate who wants to see him genocided, how would a moderate Democrat ever be nominated by Democratic voters when they don't believe in moderation? Democratic voters haven't turned against racial essentialism, trans ideology, feminism, utterly disproven pro-open borders economics, government censorship, stifling regulations, or throwing the Constitution in the dumpster behind the National Archives. It's just everybody else has.
And that's what will keep the rightwing coalition strong, it's about who they're not voting for. They're not voting for Jeb Bush, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, or anybody else who longs for a return to serfdom. And they're not voting for anybody who not just doesn't know what a woman is, they're not voting for anybody who can't turn to their own party and tell them that it's stupid they don't know what a woman is. And anybody who can do that on the left is going to have a real time dodging both the tar and the feathers. The delusion that some magical "coalition" is otherwise needed is, well, let's just say Kamala didn't actually win Iowa by 10 points because reality doesn't work the way liberals think it does.
As for the five recommended articles, that seems like a great idea.
“Rightwing populism is ascendent, meanwhile the Democrats will not be able to get their act together for decades.”
The ‘Emerging Democratic Majority’ called, it wants its inevitability back.
”I think Dems remain stuck in the deep delusion of a "Trump cult."
You mistake the cult as merely being constituted by praise of the leader, when that is secondary. What is primary is the *refusal to criticize the leader*. Any Republican who has been remotely critical of Trump, even just for breaking campaign promises (Iran) or building ballrooms to himself while affordability remains unaddressed, has been summarily excommunicated from the party. That is the cult’s nature.
Rightwing populism needs cults of personality to work. The cult of personality is what legitimates the loyalty to the strongman over loyalty to political institutions, laws, norms, etc. Those institutions get in the way of inflicting pain on the out group and the consolidation of power in the strongman’s hands, which is the spiritual core of rightwing populism. You see it everywhere rightwing populism reigns—without its Erdogan, its Orban, its Bukele, it all falls apart.
Unfortunately, in the U.S. people are now-seeing what mask-off rightwing sadopopulism really looks like. It is openly kleptocratic, unrepentantly corrupt, and fairly unconcerned with anything the leader doesn’t feel like focusing on, save for inflicting pain on the outgroup. That is why its leader’s approval ratings are already lower than his predecessor’s—‘owning the libs’, renaming lakes and building ballrooms for yourself, and calling for any internal critics to be crushed, doesn’t fundamentally improve people’s livelihoods. This has always been the case, and is why historically it has required the strongman to corrupt and subordinate democratic institutions to perpetuate his movement.
Well, the emerging Democratic majority was based on pseudoscience by humanities academics, while political eras are based on centuries of data. Neoliberalism had its run, rightwing populism is taking over, it's not a guarantee, but it's a runaway favorite.
As far as not criticizing the leader, I think you missed a good chunk of my comment, or did I just miss all the criticism of Dear Leader Barack Obama? Even now Democrats openly say its the voters' fault Hillary lost. And I've read hundreds of online comments about "all the people who stayed home" in 2024 just because they couldn't get their socialist way and petulantly refused to vote for Kamala, never mind that all those people are imaginary and Democrats simply aren't a majority political movement anymore.
As to rightwing populism needing a strong man, I haven't seen any empirical reason to believe that, though I guess liberal kleptocracy needs a strong man, as after Barack Obama it's really fallen apart. Biden managing to swipe as much as he could on the way out the door before pardoning the members of his crime family. As far as conservative populists needing to subordinate democratic institutions to perpetuate the movement, all I've seen is Trump win two legitimate democratic elections fair and square (at least on his side). It seems that being an authoritarian or a fascist is about the only thing Trump's legitimately failed at.